Kelly McParland: U.S. inaugural celebrates the presidency, not necessarily the president

U.S. inaugural celebrates the presidency, but not necessarily the president

There can’t be another country on earth that matches the U.S. in the money and effort it puts into glorifying and celebrating its government, an institution it professes to despise.

Preparations for Monday’s presidential inauguration demonstrate all the innate American love of patriotic display. Any chance to haul out the flags and the bunting is embraced. According to the Wall Street Journal it will cost $50 million to pay for the parade, the balls and the other festivities that go with swearing in President Barack Obama – who was actually sworn in quietly on Sunday but will do it again today for the crowd. The money comes from donors, corporate and otherwise. This being Obama’s second inauguration, the enthusiasm isn’t what it used to be, and moving tickets is reportedly a bit of a grind. Still, the entertainment includes Smokey Robinson, Alicia Keys, Stevie Wonder and the cast of ‘Glee’, and dining and dancing is expected to go on well into the night.

All this for a president a significant portion of the country considers a failure, in a town Americans rank just above Sodom and Gomorrah in general respectability. A recent poll found Congress less popular than root canals, NFL replacement referees, head lice, colonoscopies, traffic jams, Donald Trump, France, Genghis Khan, used-car salesmen and brussels sprouts.

Inaugurations are also a time for assessments, and Obama’s record, despite his re-election victory, remains underwhelming. David Rothkopf, writing in the New York Times, says one reason (among many) Obama has struggled so much is that he’s just a flat-out lousy manager.

The administration has not done a good job of delegating to and empowering cabinet officials. Nor does it seem to have built necessary teams and coalitions or anticipated and planned for likely challenges. The Obama team’s failure to make the most of stimulus funding, to make progress on climate change, to react swiftly to international crises in Egypt, Libya and Syria, and to maintain good relations with allies on Capitol Hill and beyond stem from lack of managerial skill.

In a city that exists on schmoozing and trading favours, Obama remains the most aloof president since Richard Nixon, says Rothkopf. The theme of the president as a one-man-show was explored in his first term ins The Obamas, a book that described his tendency to run the administration alone, from his study in the White House residential quarters. A small coterie of loyalist, non-Washington friends is allowed inside the bubble, but there’s no room for powerbrokers or congressional decision-makers, which goes a long way to explaining why the president has a difficult time getting compromises out of people he shows little regard for. Almost unbelievably, according to the Times, he has yet to invite Bill and Hillary Clinton to dinner, despite the fact the former president pulled out all the stops in personally campaigning for Mr. Obama’s re-election, and Mrs. Clinton has been among the hardest-working and most respected members of his cabinet.

Obama’s solitary nature applies to Democrats and Republicans alike. Rothkopf notes he rarely consulted congressional leaders during his re-election campaign, striving to keep them from his appearances instead. Top advisers feel alienated. When he does seek “consultations,” he gives the impression he’s there to sell his view rather than listen to their.

Rothkopf argues the fault is not all Obama’s but an electorate that doesn’t consider managerial ability when choosing a president. Most presidents have at least run a state before they get elected, but Mr. Obama had never run more than a small senate staff, then was handed the entire, vast, sprawling American bureaucracy.

The American electorate doesn’t ask questions about management skills. Congress rarely raises the issue of management when considering nominees for large, complicated cabinet agencies, many of which are larger than big corporations. Establishing a culture in which the metrics of successful governance are valued, discussed and evaluated is a vital step toward addressing a problem of which the current president’s management troubles is but a symptom. It would be helpful to have a permanent professional bureaucracy with continuing management responsibilities, as do many other nations.

It takes a small army to organize an inauguration. Yet Mr. Obama wants to run a country, save an economy and introduce contentious legislation on the force of his personality and strength of his arguments. The results of his first administration might be an argument for adapting a new approach in his second.

In the wake of a Grammy Awards ceremony that disappointed many, from Kanye West to the masses on Twitter lamenting the state of pop music, a historical perspective is key. Few are better poised to offer one than Andy Kim.